Reader Ad Slot
Reader Ad Slot placeholder
If you would like to support SpookStack without paying out of pocket, please consider allowing advertising cookies. It helps cover hosting costs and keeps the archive free to browse. You can change this choice at any time.
John L Lewis — Part 25
Page 76
76 / 109
‘Re: JOHN L. LEWIS, ET AL
INTERVIEW WITH Mr. BERTHA who was an official of the National
JOHN BERTHA Tabor Relations Board and who hand the details of the ~
ction conducted in Springfield, Illinois to determine
who would be the bargaining Acent for the Mine B Coal Company was located
at Peoria, Illinois and interviewed by Special Agent Ga
September 16, 1943.
t
Mr. BERTHS is presently working at
_— He is quite willing to testily 1or ene wovernmen y)
1s case provided he is subpoenaed. Mr, BERTHA-statedthat-he-end— ¥
LE. BAJORK worked on the Mine B case together and that from the very cubeset
hey tert teneiderable difficulty in petting action from the National Labor
Board in Washington particularly with reference to certifying an election.
When they came to Springfield they fourd a very tense situation and as such
felt that it should be dealt with immediately. Mir. BERTHA stated that the
election of December 15, 1937 was conducted fairly in every respect. He
advised that he prided himself upon the way that he conducted his elections
as a National Labor Board representative and that even after he had pone
into private industry various unions had requested him to came and conduct
elections. Mr. BERTHA had a very clear recollection of the dif "culties
under which he worked and of the events which occurred at that time. He
stated that the United Mine Workers made several charges alleging the
election was unfain First, that the election was conducted in a vicinity
where liquor was available. Second, that people voted who were not on
the payroll of the Mine B Commany. Third, that the United Mine Workers
were not represented in the election. Fourth, that seven men who were
under indictment and being tried in mine bombing cases were not eligible
to vote. Fifth, that there was coercion.
In answer to these charges Mr. BERTHA stated that it would have been
difficult to lecate an election place in Springfield which would not be
near some liquor dispensing store. They were very careful to pick a place
that would be absolutely neutra] due to the strong feeling on both sides,
and the Armory was selected as the most likely place. The Armory was also
selected because it was felt that if it were held on government property
there would be Ie $s chance for any violence. Even then the mayor of
Springfield who was very conceryed over the situation stated that he woulc
hold Mr. BERTHA responsible for any destruction of property in the Amory.
Relative to the persons who voted in the election ire BERTHA stated
that the payroll was certified by the employer himself and that this. =<
contention was baseless. The United Mine Workers were not repres a.
in the election because of their own action, by refusing to Ps x4
Among the charges brought by the United Mine Workers was‘
Rational labor Board representatives displayed favoritism towar
= 680 -
Reveal the original PDF page, then click a word to highlight the OCR text.
Community corrections
No user corrections yet.
Comments
No comments on this document yet.
Bottom Reader Ad Slot
Bottom Reader Ad Slot placeholder
If you would like to support SpookStack without paying out of pocket, please consider allowing advertising cookies. It helps cover hosting costs and keeps the archive free to browse. You can change this choice at any time.
Continue Exploring
Agency Collection
Explore This Archive Cluster
Broad Topic Hub
Topic Hub
letter
bureau
Related subtopics
Subtopic
Subtopic
Subtopic
Subtopic
Subtopic
Subtopic